Another WWJD

Mike Tantillo wrote:

> There are two types of ramp metering IMO:
>
> 1) A fast cycling meter which will spread the platoon of arriving cars
> out onto the freeway
> 2) a slow meter which serves to limit access to the freeway by holding
> cars on the ramps for an excessive amount of time, while keeping an
> empty mainline.
>
> IMO, the first form is acceptable, the second is not. I've sort of
> suspected that MN uses the second form.
>
>
>>Contrary to Mr. Carr's opinion, they're an important element of the
>>overall freeway management system.

People in New York City disliked ramp meters so much that they pretty
much vandalized them out of existence. There were meters installed on
ramps to the Van Wyck Expressway near JFK airport several years ago.
The signal heads were smashed to bits in no time.

I think it would have made more sense to close the ramps near to the
airport completely at certain times and improve access from the local
streets. You can get to the airport from local streets but it is tricky
to get where you want to go on the airport's internal roads.

John Mara

> You misunderstand the purpose of metering. It's not intended to
> improve traffic flow globally; it's sole purpose is to improve traffic
> flow locally in the vicinity of the on ramp. It does this by
> preventing a phalanx of cars, all tailgating each other and driving at
> 35 MPH, from trying to move en masse onto the 65 MPH freeway. This is
> the same principle that allows 1000 strands of human hair to be washed
> easily down a bathroom drain if they enter the drain one at a time,
> whereas those same 1000 hairs will cause a nasty clog if they are all
> released into the drain simultaneously.

So it's yet one more "solution" to try (and fail miserably) to solve the
problem of people who don't know how to drive. Excellent. -Dave

> When CDOT put in the ramp meters on north I-25, it kept records of
> travel times and speeds and found that after the meters went
> operational, they improved peak hour speeds and travel times.

That sounds like stats were spun after-the-fact to justify a bad decision.
I've no doubt the numbers show higher speeds ON the freeway, but who (if
anybody) was keeping track of -total- travel time? (as opposed to travel
time on the highway) I'd be willing to bet that it increased
ignificantly. -Dave

John Mara wrote:
> Mike Tantillo wrote:
>
>> There are two types of ramp metering IMO:
>>
>> 1) A fast cycling meter which will spread the platoon of arriving cars
>> out onto the freeway
>> 2) a slow meter which serves to limit access to the freeway by holding
>> cars on the ramps for an excessive amount of time, while keeping an
>> empty mainline.
>>
>> IMO, the first form is acceptable, the second is not. I've sort of
>> suspected that MN uses the second form.
>>
>>
>>>Contrary to Mr. Carr's opinion, they're an important element of the
>>>overall freeway management system.
>
> People in New York City disliked ramp meters so much that they pretty
> much vandalized them out of existence. There were meters installed on
> ramps to the Van Wyck Expressway near JFK airport several years ago.
> The signal heads were smashed to bits in no time.

While I lived there, Las Vegas installed ramp meters on US 95 northwest
of the Rainbow Curve interchange, with a bypass lane for cars with two
or more passengers. I remember a lot of complaints about the stoplight,
and about the tickets given out to people who ignored the meters or used
the bypass with one driver. I don't know if more direct measures were
taken or not, but wouldn't be surprised if it happened considering the
hostility.


--
Pat O'Connell
[note munged EMail address]
Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
Kill nothing but vandals...

>>So it's yet one more "solution" to try (and fail miserably) to solve the
>>problem of people who don't know how to drive. Excellent.
>
> <shrug> That's the world in which we live. What are YOU doing to
> change it?

Nothing. The stupid are breeding at such an insanely high rate that the
more intelligent among us will be overwhelmed even if we have sex 24/7. In
short, we are doomed. -Dave

"Dave" > wrote in message
reenews.net...
>
>>>So it's yet one more "solution" to try (and fail miserably) to solve the
>>>problem of people who don't know how to drive. Excellent.
>>
>> <shrug> That's the world in which we live. What are YOU doing to
>> change it?
>
> Nothing. The stupid are breeding at such an insanely high rate that the
> more intelligent among us will be overwhelmed even if we have sex 24/7.
> In short, we are doomed. -Dave

Who are "The stupid"?

brink

Dave wrote:
> > When CDOT put in the ramp meters on north I-25, it kept records of
> > travel times and speeds and found that after the meters went
> > operational, they improved peak hour speeds and travel times.
>
> That sounds like stats were spun after-the-fact to justify a bad decision.

Not at all. It was a good decision. What is your basis for suggesting
the stats are "spun?"

> I've no doubt the numbers show higher speeds ON the freeway, but who (if
> anybody) was keeping track of -total- travel time? (as opposed to travel
> time on the highway) I'd be willing to bet that it increased
> ignificantly. -Dave

Doubtful, actually.

When you suggest that meters simply make up for people who don't know
how to drive correctly, the fact is that driving correctly would have
the drivers behave in the way the meters spit them out into the flow
anyway.

> Who are "The stupid"?
>
> brink

You SURE you want me to answer that? That's one of those questions
where, if you have to ask . . .

In article ews.net>,
Dave > wrote:
>I've no doubt the numbers show higher speeds ON the freeway, but who (if
>anybody) was keeping track of -total- travel time? (as opposed to travel
>time on the highway) I'd be willing to bet that it increased
>ignificantly. -Dave

Depends on how long your trip stays on the freeway. If you get on the
freeway and get off at the next exit, the meters will likely slow you down.
But if you get on the freeway and stay there for a while, the extra speed
by not having traffic jams at each on-ramp you pass will more than compensate
for the wait at the meter when you enter.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

In article ews.net>,
Dave > wrote:
>> When CDOT put in the ramp meters on north I-25, it kept records of
>> travel times and speeds and found that after the meters went
>> operational, they improved peak hour speeds and travel times.
>
>That sounds like stats were spun after-the-fact to justify a bad decision.
>I've no doubt the numbers show higher speeds ON the freeway, but who (if
>anybody) was keeping track of -total- travel time? (as opposed to travel
>time on the highway) I'd be willing to bet that it increased
>ignificantly. -Dave

Traffic flow is nonlinear. Causing one person to wait may
increase or decrease total trip time for all people.


--
John Carr )